By Jackie Alan Giuliano, Ph.D.

Toxic Toys Are Still Out There

"We're afraid of intimacy, of wildness, of love; afraid
of the very things we desire, because if we acknowledged
them we would have to acknowledge the possibility of
losing them. If we fail in this century, it won't be
because of arrogance, it'll be because of fear."
-- Terry Tempest Williams

Parents today have an arsenal of plastic products for their babies. Teething rings, rubber ducks, bottles, and all shapes and sizes of plastic toys litter a child’s landscape. They are convenient, colorful, and fairly inexpensive. Children love them and these toys often give parents a much needed few minutes rest from the intensity of occupying a child’s time.

But the convenience and colorful shapes come at a high price. The polyvinyl chloride or vinyl that so many of these toys are made of frequently contains toxic additives that have been linked in animal studies to a variety of illnesses, including reproductive damage and damage to the kidneys and liver.

Loving parents surround their child with plastic toys. (Photo credit unknown)

Most of us cannot imagine life without plastic. Such products are everywhere from the ubiquitous water bottle carried by millions of people around the world every day to the food containers that contain the lunch we bring to work. Our computers, televisions, VCRs, CD players, and cars are filled with millions of tons of plastic. But now that you think about it, is it any surprise that there is a price to pay for surrounding ourselves with these complex, unnatural chemical products?

The production of plastic begins with crude oil and natural gas. The components of these fossil fuels are heated, resulting in their conversion into hydrocarbons such as ethylene and propylene. Further processing creates styrene, vinyl chloride, ethylene glycol, terephthalic acid and many others. These molecules are then chemically bonded into chains known as polymers. These polymers and their many combinations produce the abundance of plastic forms we have today.

Plastics are made up of many toxic chemicals that cause great harm if ingested by animals or humans. If these chemicals stayed bound in the plastic, then workers in plastic factories would have to take precautions, but there wouldn’t be a health issue to the consumer.

The problem is that these complex molecules don’t all stay bound in some plastics, but some leech out into our food, our skin – or into babies’ mouths.

As with most environmental health issues, since illnesses won’t show up immediately in most individuals, it is easy to say “oh, come on now, my water bottle and my child’s teething ring can’t be harming us.” Convenience is a powerful aphrodisiac.

Plastic toys containing plasticizers known as phthalates (Photo courtesy Greenpeace)

The United States has no such prohibition and in fact has lobbied the European Commission to ease their ban and to buy U.S. vinyl baby products.

But industry pressure remains strong to block such bans elsewhere, claiming that environmental groups like Greenpeace who support the ban are trying to “further its own agenda,” says the International Council of Toy Industries.

What could be the devious agenda of a group trying to protect infants from toxic chemicals that the toy manufacturers refer to in their press releases?

The evidence that phthalates are dangerous is very strong. Phthalates are known as plasticizers that are added to PVC to make it soft and elastic. Plasticizers account for more than half the weight of some flexible PVC products. About 95 percent of all phthalates produced are used in PVC.

Here’s the problem. Charlie Cray, in an article for the June 18, 1998 issue of "Rachel’s Environment & Health Weekly" (REHW), said, “Since they are not chemically bound to the PVC polymer itself, phthalates readily leach out of PVC products. Up to one percent of the phthalate content of PVC products is released each year. As a result of their continuous release during the production, use and disposal of PVC products, phthalates are often described as the ‘most abundant man-made environmental pollutants.’”

Diisononyl phthalate, or DINP, the phthalate most commonly found in toys, is a known toxic hazard. That same issue of REHW reported that “the warning label of a bottle of DINP sold to an experimental laboratory says, ‘May cause cancer; harmful by inhalation, in contact with skin, and if swallowed; possible risk of irreversible effects; avoid exposure; and wear suitable protective clothing, gloves, and eye/face protection.’

But a typical PVC teething ring or bath duck, which contains about 40 percent by weight of DINP, either has no label or has a label that reads “Non-Toxic.”

In December 1998, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) staff completed an analysis, “The Risk of Chronic Toxicity Associated with Exposure to Diisononyl Phthalate (DINP) in Children’s Products.” As a result of this analysis and recommendations made by CPSC staff, some U.S. toy manufacturers voluntarily agreed to remove DINP from rattles and teethers. Also, some large retail chains agreed not to sell rattles, teethers, pacifiers, or baby bottle nipples that contained phthalates. This recommendation carried no force of law and today, it is hard to find products that carry labels saying they are free of phthalates.

On June 15, 2001, the CPSC released a report that stated, "There may be a risk of health effects from DINP exposure for any young children who routinely mouth DINP-plasticized toys for 75 minutes/day or more."

Child sucks on a BabyBjorn® toy made from non-toxic plastic, with no PVC and no phtalates. (Photo courtesy BabyBjorn)

The Greenpeace testing was conducted by independent laboratories in the U.S. and Germany, which analyzed 54 products from 20 countries. In addition to phthalates and organotins, lead, cadmium and bisphenol A were found. Bisphenol A is a chemical that is known to interfere with the hormone system of the body.

The irresponsibility of the scientists and agencies in charge of protecting our health is maddening. In the Consumer Product Safety Commission report presented by a panel of experts charged with determining if DINP was harmful, contradictions and errors in reason abound.

While the report admits that DINP caused cancer in rats, on page 12 of this 169 page document it states, “The CHAP concludes that humans do not currently receive DINP doses from DINP containing consumer products that are plausibly associated with a significant increase in cancer risk.”

A few paragraphs earlier, though, they eroded any confidence in that statement by admitting, “The exposure estimates addressed oral exposures only. Dermal exposure is expected from products plasticized with DINP in prolonged contact with external skin or oral mucosa; however the magnitude of this exposure is uncertain.” I guess there were no stay-at-home-parents on the committee, who could have told you that some of these toys spend as much time on a baby’s skin as they do in their mouth.

The most surprising admission of the report may be that all the laboratory rats used in the studies were adults, even though the subject of the investigation was to determine the effect of the chemical on infants! The report states, “The chemical has not been tested for carcinogenicity in young rodents, an important limitation given that infants and toddlers are the ones most exposed to DINP.” Children and young animals are considerably more susceptible to chemical exposure than adults.

And in the most condemning statement on the failings of animal research I have seen in print in a long time, the report admits that, “Chronic carcinogenicity studies have not been conducted in non-rodent species. Because of the lack of confidence in the relevance of the DINP rodent studies to humans, studies in species believed to produce results of greater relevance are clearly needed.”

Millions of dollars are spent to try to keep businesses healthy. These reports all begin with the assumption that if you cannot prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that a chemical causes harm, then it should be continued to be produced.

Don’t wait for scientists to come to the rescue and don’t assume that a scientific report will answer your questions. It won’t. Only your heart and soul and your love for your child can be your guide. Don’t take chances – use only toys you KNOW do not contain PVC or phthalates. And don’t expect toxic toys to leave the store shelves anytime soon.

RESOURCES

1. See the Greenpeace data on the toxicity of vinyl toys at: http://www.greenpeaceusa.org/media/press_releases/01_06_15.htm

2. See the complete Rachel’s Environment and Health Weekly report at: http://www.rachel.org/bulletin/bulletin.cfm?Issue_ID=514

3. See the Consumer Product Safety Commission 2001 report at: http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/Foia01/os/dinp.pdf

4. Find out who your Congressional representatives are and e-mail them. Tell them that they must enact legislation banning phthalates in children’s toys. If you know your Zip code, you can find them at: http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/ziptoit.html

5. See a fact sheet on the hazards of PVC at: http://www.greenpeaceusa.org/media/factsheets/poisonplastic.htm

6. Do not buy plastic products for your children unless they clearly say “NO PVC” on the box.

7. Bath toys, infant utensils, and some other toys by Munchkin are PVC free. You can find bath ducks that are free of DINP and other phthalates at most toy stores. Greenpeace has a list of some companies and whether or not they have non-toxic toys at: http://www.greenpeaceusa.org/media/mediakits/vinyltoyslisttext.htm
http://www.greenpeaceusa.org/media/publications/vinyltoys.htm
http://www.greenpeaceusa.org/features/reportcard2000text.htm
You will be surprised at some of the large companies that are making NO attempt to resolve this issue.

8. Wood toys made from sustainable wood products are a good substitute. For example, Plan Toys at: http://www.plantoys.com uses plantation rubberwood (Hevea brasiliensis), which is recovered from old rubber trees after they no longer generate latex and are due for burning. They use no chemicals or wood preservatives.

{Jackie Alan Giuliano, Ph.D. is a writer and teacher in Seattle. He can be found searching for non-toxic toys – and wondering what he missed. Please send your thoughts, comments, and visions to him at: jackie@healingourworld.com and visit his website at: http://www.healingourworld.com}